----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg London" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steve Lhomme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 5:30 PM Subject: Re: binary restrictions?
| Steve Lhomme wrote: | > | A binary is a derived work. | > | > Are you sure of that ? When you compile | > you USE the code not MODIFY it. | > There's no derivation. Otherwise using | > a software and changing the default | > settings would be a derived work... | | source code is text that follows the | rules of grammar for a particular language | (C, C++, Perl, Java, Python, etc) | | A binary is text that follows the rules of | grammar for a different language. | The symbols are different from English | alpha-numeric, the rules are different, | but it is a readable language, nonetheless. | (having debugged microcontroller machine | code years ago, I can vouch for readability) | | converting source code to binary is in | effect a *translation* from one language | to another. That makes good sense. But in this case, why is their different rules for source code and binary versions of a work in most open-source licenses ? I mean if it's a derived work, the rules applied are the same one of a derived work. peace -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
